Today's confirmation that Apple is going x86 makes today a historic day in the industry. It may mean that Microsoft might see a few percent decline of their market share the next few years, but what about Linux? If Linux were to lose an equal amount of share it would alter its spread to the desktop, a spread that has been very positive so far.

Whether or not OSX is a "better desktop experience" is entirely subjective. It is a matter of opinion, not fact. Having used all three OSes (Windows, Linux, OSX), I can say that the OSX UI is actually my least favored one. So one cannot simply surmise that users will naturally gravitate towards OSX.

Regarding software installation: ordinary users don't install that many applications once they have the tools they need. Getting the "very latest build possible NOW" is not something you'll find much outside of geek circles. The vast majority of users are better served by a combination of repositories + graphical installers for commercial software, which is exactly what we have on Linux now.

Attacking the repository system seems to be the new warhorse of anti-Linux critics, but like so much FUD before it it is based on faulty assumptions. First, repositories usually only contain open-source software, so if one is to compare apples with apples (pun intended), one would first compare to see if, as a general rule, OSX or Windows versions of open-source software are available quicker than repository packages for Debian or Mandriva (as an example). If you can prove to me that the same open-source apps are generally available for OSX or Windows quicker, then your argument might have merit. Otherwise, it's apples and oranges.

There are some interesting alternatives for Linux, such as Autopackage, Klik and Zeroinstall (which resembles the OSX method, IIRC). In the meantime, there's nothing preventing ISVs from using GUI installers, such as the Loki installer, to install across a variety of distro. If Codeweavers can use it, I don't see why others couldn't!